Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Omni-2B

Darwin-36B-Opus and LFM3-Omni-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Darwin-36B-Opus C

Best for Reasoning-heavy text tasks on a 32 GB machine or a single 80 GB GPU, where a disclosed training method isn't required

Ahead on

  • Risk, 55 against 40
  • Documentation and upkeep, 61 against 49

Watch for

The merge method is proprietary and the current weights include an undescribed targeted refinement

LFM3-Omni-2B C

Best for Voice and camera agents on a laptop or phone that want one small model for hearing, seeing, speaking and calling tools

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Risk Darwin-36B-Opus +15

Darwin-36B-Opus 55

File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only with no code in the repository, so the card's trust_remote_code flag loads nothing extra. Provenance 15, the files are in the FINAL-Bench organisation that vidraft.net links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file. Safety evaluation 0 and agent guidance 0, nothing published. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 through the whole chain with no conditions added. Security programme 0, no security.txt, policy or contact.

LFM3-Omni-2B 40

File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.

Documentation and upkeep Darwin-36B-Opus +12

Darwin-36B-Opus 61

Model card 11, it covers architecture, parameters, context and languages but not intended use, limitations or a knowledge cut-off. Training data 5, the reasoning parent's fine-tune is described without datasets or a cut-off. Last change 20, on 1 November 2026 the publisher added a LICENSE file and a corrected eval_results note to the main repository and edited the POCKET-35B-GGUF card, read as this run reads card edits on other open-weight listings (Muse Glimmer 30B, MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B, Apertus v1.5 8B). The weights date from 23 April and the GGUF build from 22 July. Responsiveness 20, the publisher answered 8 of the 13 discussions, and two of the rest are its own posts. Version policy 5, a first release whose weights were replaced twice in its first day with commit titles but no card note. File health 0, the card's head counts and base still disagree with the files, and the generation config drops the base's end-of-turn stop token. 11 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 0 = 61.

LFM3-Omni-2B 49

Model card 14, Intended use (one on-device model in place of separate speech recognition, vision, language and speech models), architecture, parameters (2.17B), context (32K) and the text and speech languages. Training data 5, the card has no training section. Last change 20, the last commit, on 3 November 2026, changed the card's navigation icons, seven days before this check, and the one before it, on 28 October, documented video frame rate and frame limits. Responsiveness 0, none of the 12 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 October to 9 November 2026) has a reply from a LiquidAI member. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 5, the card gives a 32K context while config.json gives the language model 128,000 positions and Liquid's API lists 128,000 for the hosted model, so the card and the files don't agree on context. 14 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 49.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runDarwin-36B-OpusLFM3-Omni-2BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258080even
Risk20%205540Darwin-36B-Opus +15
Agent interface10%107070even
Documentation and upkeep10%106149Darwin-36B-Opus +12
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactDarwin-36B-OpusLFM3-Omni-2B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorFINAL-Bench (VIDRAFT)Liquid AI
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-04-232026-11-03
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews2.5/5 (4)none

How the scores have moved

Verdicts

Darwin-36B-Opus

A text-only reasoning cousin merged from Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and a reasoning-distilled fine-tune of it, with about 3B active parameters. It needs 32 GB for the publisher's 4-bit GGUF or about 83 GB in BF16, and runs in vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp. The main risks are an undisclosed merge method, a card that disagrees with its files, and no safety results.

LFM3-Omni-2B

One 2.17B model that sees, listens and talks on an 8 GB machine and turns spoken requests into tool calls. Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release. The context is 32K, it doesn't reason, Liquid hasn't answered a question on the repository, and there are no safety results or data sources.

Before you call either

Darwin-36B-Opus

  1. Quickest start is llama-server -hf FINAL-Bench/POCKET-35B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 21 GB of files
  2. On the reference machine BF16 fits, vllm serve FINAL-Bench/Darwin-36B-Opus --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, the parsers for Qwen3.6's format
  3. Thinking is on by default, send chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention
  4. The card suggests temperature 0.6 to 0.7 and at least 5,120 new tokens for its think traces
  5. generation_config.json stops only on the end-of-text token, so add <|im_end|> as a stop token if a runtime keeps generating after the turn ends
  6. Text only, the vision encoder of Qwen3.6-35B-A3B isn't in these files
  7. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

LFM3-Omni-2B

  1. Start it with llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-Omni-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja or ollama run lfm3-omni
  2. Greedy decoding for text. For speech use audio_temperature 0.4 and audio_repetition_penalty 1.2, per the card
  3. The context is 32K, and llama.cpp samples video at 2 frames a second up to 384 frames
  4. Parse tool calls yourself from the XML it returns
  5. It doesn't reason, so don't pass enable_thinking
  6. Validate JSON output yourself

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Darwin-36B-Opus or LFM3-Omni-2B?

Darwin-36B-Opus and LFM3-Omni-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C).

Other comparisons with Darwin-36B-Opus or LFM3-Omni-2B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.